athene: (Default)
[personal profile] athene
This is just way too crazy. It makes me scared about the future.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/Northeast/03/04/iraq.usa.shirt.reut/index.html

Date: 2003-03-06 06:59 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] darktouch.livejournal.com
Lies!
Lies of the Jewish Controlled Media!

*cough cough*
Sorry, tried to keep a straight face as I said that.

Date: 2003-03-06 07:00 am (UTC)
chrisvenus: (Default)
From: [personal profile] chrisvenus
Isnt' america great? :) If it were this country I'd say it would be laughed out of court. With the things I have heard about some of what has gone to trial in america I am not quite so sure... :) If you do follow the story I would be most interested in hearing about the court case. :) My opinion is that it should end up with the sacking of the two secuity guards for infringement of rights or something. Can I put five bucks on that please? :)

Date: 2003-03-06 07:43 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] maninblak.livejournal.com
Legally they are in the right. If the security guards said "Take the shirt off our leave mall property" and the man refused to do neither then he was technically trespassing. Malls are private property, it doesnt matter what the reason is for them wanting you off, if you don't go then you are trespassing.

Date: 2003-03-06 08:12 am (UTC)
chrisvenus: (Default)
From: [personal profile] chrisvenus
Ture I suppose. I still think it is damn silly though. :)

Date: 2003-03-06 09:40 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] ambermoon.livejournal.com
It's still a violation of the First Amendment. ('Course, the First Amendment gets ignored all the time. There are even laws on the books that break it.)

Date: 2003-03-06 01:29 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] agent13.livejournal.com
It's still a violation of the First Amendment.

Malls, shopping centers and the like have been found by the courts to be private property. While I find what the Crossgates Mall did to be ignorant and stupid, and that they deserve the firestorm that they've ignited, they're no more liable for violating anyone's Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech in this case than you would be if you had me taken away after I walked into your house to explain this point without your permission.

Date: 2003-03-06 07:09 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] catling42.livejournal.com
*twitch* that's scary. mewww...

Let the lawsuits roll, baby!

Date: 2003-03-06 07:22 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] agent13.livejournal.com
Mall drops T-shirt charges (http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=112620&category=REGION&BCCode=HOME&newsdate=3/6/2003)

Re: Let the lawsuits roll, baby!

Date: 2003-03-06 08:20 am (UTC)
chrisvenus: (Default)
From: [personal profile] chrisvenus
I'm intrigued by the claims that they didn't go down because of the t-shirt but because they were asked to because of a potential disturbance. Why then was the only action they demanded the removal of the t-shirt? I may be missing something here I expect though. :)

October 2015

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314 151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Mar. 3rd, 2026 12:55 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios